I take notes with the keyboard (virtual or hardware) and can sketch surprising well with my finger -- anything more serious and I'll turn to a vector graphics app or a proper Wacom tablet.
Perhaps the same way a diesel-electric locomotive works? Then again, there's always a lot of oil on the tracks where locomotives sit and idle at the station I use, so maybe they're not much better than other two-stroke designs in that respect.
Compromising between different options is part of the design process. The antenna is an improvement for many people if you care to do the research. Glass is harder than plastic, so it doesn't scratch as easily. It may also be more environmentally friendly.
Just to code some simple hello world application you would have needed to buy a "coding" license from Apple. Not really feasible for a 10 year old kid who is just starting to learn programming.
Not any less feasible than having an iPod touch to begin with, surely?
iMacs have a Firewire 800 port. I know a lot of people who do all their video work on external drives anyway, since it's much easier than taking the drives out of the machine all time to upgrade them or give them to another person to work on.
I think both Aperture and Lightroom show that Photoshop shouldn't be too relaxed about its position at the top. Many people used to do all their photo editing in Photoshop. I do most editing in Aperture, now, and only use Photoshop to fill the gap. But even then, other specialised apps often do a better job -- photo-stiching is a good example here. I also use Photoshop in web design, but while it's powerful enough for such things, it's hardly tailored to those tasks and there is a gap for a web-specific app that would make life much easier.
Photoshop is a Swiss Army knife. And while those are really handy, they can often be replaced by specialised tools that work well together. The bigger and more bloated Photoshop becomes, the more demand there will be for apps that specialise.
I agree that there is no viable alternative at the moment, but that's only because there is no urgent need for one. My main point was that if Adobe were to ever do something silly such as cut off CS for Mac (which I doubt they'll do), that's when I think you'll see viable Photoshop alternatives showing up, whether they're Swiss Army knives or a number of specialised packages.
It's only an industry standard because it has no competition. Once the competition is there, people will switch. People switched from QuarkXPress to InDesign -- what will stop them from switching from Photoshop to something else?
In time, the rat brain cells will be replaced with something synthetic. Once that is done, will it then be a machine even when the functionality becomes identical?
A good question indeed. I guess it depends if androids dream of electric sheep.
Slashdot Mirror
I take notes with the keyboard (virtual or hardware) and can sketch surprising well with my finger -- anything more serious and I'll turn to a vector graphics app or a proper Wacom tablet.
Perhaps the same way a diesel-electric locomotive works? Then again, there's always a lot of oil on the tracks where locomotives sit and idle at the station I use, so maybe they're not much better than other two-stroke designs in that respect.
Multitouch is fine. People don't want pens.
It's not a case of hue. It's a case of luminance. White surfaces reflect light, whereas black surfaces absorb light. But you already knew that.
Ever seen the inside areas of a camera lens body? They're usually black for a reason.
This article seems to fit the original definition just fine.
Good. Last thing I want is a company that doesn't innovate because it's worried about stepping on developer's toes.
I've yet to encounter any issues. Then again, I wasn't an early adopter of the service, so perhaps they've been working to improve it?
Links, please?
Apple knows they need to care about my privacy if they want to continue receiving my money.
I don't. But I do web dev. OS X is great in that respect.
Apple... for when you have better thoughts to think about.
Which is still steadily growing in market share? Which had the advantage of a monopoly, allowing them to get away with the problem of fragmentation?
Some of us are OK with paying a reasonable price for a good service.
On Mac, it sort-of syncs with the built-in applications (but not much else).
Sort-of syncs with a Mac? Perhaps you could go into a bit more detail?
On Windows, it supposedly syncs with Outlook.
Supposedly? Are you suggesting there is a reason to think it doesn't work properly?
If you use both a desktop and a laptop, things get even more complicated.
Not if you just sync it with one of them. MobileMe works well, otherwise.
Celibacy is a mental illness? Christians force people to become priests?
Compromising between different options is part of the design process. The antenna is an improvement for many people if you care to do the research. Glass is harder than plastic, so it doesn't scratch as easily. It may also be more environmentally friendly.
Just to code some simple hello world application you would have needed to buy a "coding" license from Apple. Not really feasible for a 10 year old kid who is just starting to learn programming.
Not any less feasible than having an iPod touch to begin with, surely?
Seems more like craft than art.
When will nerds learn that design and aesthetics are not the same thing?
iMacs have a Firewire 800 port. I know a lot of people who do all their video work on external drives anyway, since it's much easier than taking the drives out of the machine all time to upgrade them or give them to another person to work on.
I think both Aperture and Lightroom show that Photoshop shouldn't be too relaxed about its position at the top. Many people used to do all their photo editing in Photoshop. I do most editing in Aperture, now, and only use Photoshop to fill the gap. But even then, other specialised apps often do a better job -- photo-stiching is a good example here. I also use Photoshop in web design, but while it's powerful enough for such things, it's hardly tailored to those tasks and there is a gap for a web-specific app that would make life much easier.
Photoshop is a Swiss Army knife. And while those are really handy, they can often be replaced by specialised tools that work well together. The bigger and more bloated Photoshop becomes, the more demand there will be for apps that specialise.
I agree that there is no viable alternative at the moment, but that's only because there is no urgent need for one. My main point was that if Adobe were to ever do something silly such as cut off CS for Mac (which I doubt they'll do), that's when I think you'll see viable Photoshop alternatives showing up, whether they're Swiss Army knives or a number of specialised packages.
What will an iPhone do that it won't, besides make phone calls?
Fit in most pockets?
It's only an industry standard because it has no competition. Once the competition is there, people will switch. People switched from QuarkXPress to InDesign -- what will stop them from switching from Photoshop to something else?
In time, the rat brain cells will be replaced with something synthetic. Once that is done, will it then be a machine even when the functionality becomes identical?
A good question indeed. I guess it depends if androids dream of electric sheep.
I'm not quoting the scientists.